WesWorld

mybe you're interested

Quoted

Originally posted by ALVAMA

I'd like to know more about this one!

I was drawing at my room and I've design it, my own design, I did't have more info about, feel free to use.

Well, I don't have anything to use it with. The idea of a late 1800s USN which actually built a halfway respectable battleline instead of thinking the Civil War ships would still work... that would be a cool alt-history, I'd think.

Quoted

Originally posted by Brockpaine
The idea of a late 1800s USN which actually built a halfway respectable battleline instead of thinking the Civil War ships would still work... that would be a cool alt-history, I'd think.

Very nice drawings. The TingYuen definitely looks like an interesting concept.

The reason the USN didn't have anything like a respectable fleet until the 1900s was quite simple. They couldn't build one and had no need for one either.

That's why i will write a little story around this ship if it's okay for you, alex ????

Did you have any stats or other informations about this ship ?

Quoted

Originally posted by Red Admiral
The reason the USN didn't have anything like a respectable fleet until the 1900s was quite simple. They couldn't build one and had no need for one either.

I disagree. I think it was less that we couldn't as much as we never actually bothered to try. The US instead decided coastal forts and Civil War-era monitors would suffice for all our national protection needs. A sloppy and arrogant way of thinking, IMHO.

Quoted

I think it was less that we couldn't as much as we never actually bothered to try.

No shipbuilding industry. No heavy industry. No base of designers. Lack of materials. The US of then was very different to now. Given the constraints they produced some really good and useful monitors, but more just isn't going to happen.

Quoted

Originally posted by Red Admiral

Quoted

I think it was less that we couldn't as much as we never actually bothered to try.

No shipbuilding industry. No heavy industry. No base of designers. Lack of materials. The US of then was very different to now. Given the constraints they produced some really good and useful monitors, but more just isn't going to happen.

...yes, but what I'm saying is that the fleet was never seen as a necessity to begin with. Had a battle-fleet been a priority, then shipyards could have been built, designers trained, etc, etc, etc. Everything I've read always indicates that the US was not willing to make any commitment to seek a world-class fleet. And thus, those very factors you named remained until the US began building that fleet, albeit at a later date.

According to Friedmann it was also much like "we couldn´t" because the USA lacked steel mills and the technology for guns of the kind needed, IIRC.

Quoted

Originally posted by HoOmAn
According to Friedmann it was also much like "we couldn´t" because the USA lacked steel mills and the technology for guns of the kind needed, IIRC.

I think the point Brock is trying to make is that some of the reason there wasn't any industry or infrastructure to support a fleet was because there wasn't a percieved need for it; The fleet, and by extention the stuff to build/support it. If the US came up with the desire/need, it'd have to develop that industry, but just because it wasn't there historically doesn't mean it couldn't have been developed; other nations did so.

Quoted

Originally posted by ShinRa_Inc

Quoted

Originally posted by HoOmAn
According to Friedmann it was also much like "we couldn´t" because the USA lacked steel mills and the technology for guns of the kind needed, IIRC.

I think the point Brock is trying to make is that some of the reason there wasn't any industry or infrastructure to support a fleet was because there wasn't a percieved need for it; The fleet, and by extention the stuff to build/support it. If the US came up with the desire/need, it'd have to develop that industry, but just because it wasn't there historically doesn't mean it couldn't have been developed; other nations did so.

Exactly what I was trying to say.

That's similar to saying that Belgium could land on the moon if they wanted to.

I disagree to an extent. The U.S. certainly had the economy to develope the infrastructure needed, it just didn't have the will to do it.

I doubt a 1960's Belgium could afford to plan for a moon shot.

That the US had the capability, but not the desire, would seem to be the case, given the rapid creation of a conscript army and an ironclad fleet during the US Civil War, the rapid withering away of both of these during the period before 1890, then the recreation of the US Navy during the years preceeding the Spanish-American War and WWI. If the capability wasn't there, then the fleet that blockaded and invaded the secessionist South in the Civil War, defeated Spain in the Spanish-American War and toured the globe in 1907-1909 with 16 battleships would have a hard time existing.

In 1881, the US had a population of 50 million, 15 million people more than Great Britain had in their 1881 census (not counting colonies); and the US population growth rate was twice that of Great Britain. True, the US was not as strong economically (per capita) as Britain, nor did the US have colonies like the British and French, but the materials were there to be developed just as they were a few years later during the Spanish-American War. If you make naval design an important field of study, then students will study that field, look abroad, and start their own design work. If you're looking to build some new warships that tax the existing shipyards, an entrepreneur in charge of one of those shipyards will look for a financier to help him improve the yard so he can bid better on the next contract.

Only once you start moving forward can you can start failing forward. The US in the 1870s-1880s was not trying to move forward in the naval realm.

The US was weak and ill-defended by choice. Right after the US Civil war you saw a large scale demobilization. In the 1870s-1880s both the army and navy were miniscule by European standards. That does not mean they could not be bigger. The rapid naval expansion prior to the Spanish-American war was not a natural outgrowth of the country’s growth rate but rather a political decision.

As for steel foundries, the US output of steel was over 2.7million tons in 1884 had already exceeded the UKs by 1889 and grew from there. Of that over 130,000 tons were open hearth production, where quality could be better controlled.

As for capacity, in the 1870s-1890s, the US was delivering over 300,000tons of commercial shipping per year. That would seem to indicate some capability.

And what is with bringing up Belgium? You know thats a silly comparison. One of the smaller nations, albeit wealthy for it’s size, a moonshot program would be a huge financial burden. Heck, Wiki says " largest commitment of resources ($25 billion), ever made by any nation in peacetime. At its peak, the Apollo program employed 400,000 people" The manpower alone would be difficult for Belgium to dedicate. The US in the late 1800s was a completely different fish.

Glad to know Friedmann is proofen wrong....

How so?

Quoted

Originally posted by HoOmAn
Glad to know Friedmann is proofen wrong....

With respect to all involved, I very much doubt that Friedman was trying to prove that an entirely different political/social development of the Post-Civil War America could (or could not) produce anything. His books are primarily technical in nature, and any "what-if" examinations tend to be as close to historical situations as possible. When he mentiones such figures and statistics, it's usually in reference to specific projects as a way of pointing out that they were not serious propositions, just design studies. I do not think he intends them to be 'the letter of the law' once you start delving into radically different alternate histories, of which is being discussed here.

Necessity is the mother of invention. The late 19th century US governments did not have the political motivation to create that inspiration or necessity, thus nothing happened beyond the odd attempt to circumvent such political limiations with the set of Monitor "rebuilds". If there was a dramatic change in political climate, you have a very different situation for those 30-40 years. You mention two specific deficiencies; Lack of steel mills, and technological development for the Guns. Well, over that span of time, mills can be built, and technology can be developed....if there's a will to do so.